61–70 of 487 posts
Mark Zuckerberg does not believe he has a monopoly. He believes there is an alternative to Facebook in the way that different car manufacturers have different competitors. Surely he can't mean this, right?
Say what you will about the intelligence of agreeing to do this hearing at all, at least Zuckerberg is clearly reading from a well-prepared speech. Winging it would have been, er, inadvisable.
>about the intelligence of agreeing to do this hearing at all, If MZ didn't voluntarily offer himself to testify, Congress could proceed to formally subpoena him. MZ could then ignore the subpoena but then he could theoretically go to jail for "contempt of Congress".
he could theoretically go to jail for "contempt of Congress".
Say what you will about the intelligence of agreeing to do this hearing at all, at least Zuckerberg is clearly reading from a well-prepared speech. Winging it would have been, er, inadvisable.
According to the Lobbying Disclosure Reports[0], if you add up outside council for Facebook, they're paying about $156,000 PER MONTH on lobbyists. You'll want to look at 2017 Q4 reports, as Q1 is not yet due and they don't file until it's absolutely due. [0]. http://disclosures.house.gov/ld/ldsearch.aspx
Mark Zuckerberg does not believe he has a monopoly. He believes there is an alternative to Facebook in the way that different car manufacturers have different competitors. Surely he can't mean this, right?
A majority of the questioning seems targeted at inspiring consumer confidence in facebook.
This isn't about serving the American people, this is about protecting corporation's ability to sell citizens personal data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The lack of strong followup questions is the best indicator that there is very little about this hearing that is spontaneous and not defined in advance. As I write this, Ms Cantwell starts her questioning and it is a markedly different style. Interesting
How could Zuckerberg know less than Wikipedia about Palantir considering Thiel's involvement with both FB and Palantir? He seems to merely know of the existence of Palantir.
Mark Zuckerberg does not believe he has a monopoly. He believes there is an alternative to Facebook in the way that different car manufacturers have different competitors. Surely he can't mean this, right?
He's smart and capable but I don't think he has perspective. Perhaps he never did.
MZ: "You control and own the content you post on Facebook" Something seems just a tad bit disingenuous about this.
"Is it true facebook can track user browsers even after they are logged out of facebook?" Zuck: "I need to get back to you on that"
Timestamp? Edit: Found it, Question from Mr. Wicker ~1:36 in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAZiDRonYZI